Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70205082

GLASS3: A standalone multi-scale seismic detection associator

Abstract

The automated global real-time association of phase picks into seismic sources comes with unique challenges when simultaneously monitoring at local, regional and global scales. High spatial variability in seismic station density, transitory seismic data availability, and time-varying noise characteristics of individual stations must be considered in the design of an associator that is fast and accurate with a low false association rate. These challenges are particularly apparent at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC), which monitors seismicity in near-real time on local, regional, and global scales using seismic data from roughly 2,100 real-time seismic stations. In order to fully leverage this large dataset, NEIC developed a stand-alone, self-configuring seismic phase associator, GLASS3 (GLobal ASSociator 3) that simultaneously processes variably scaled 3D association webs, each with a unique set of nucleation criteria (e.g., nucleation stack threshold). GLASS3 has many useful features for real-time monitoring including its computational efficiency, instantaneous pick processing, and on-the-fly configurability such as the creation and removal of targeted association webs and updates to supporting station metadata. GLASS3 runs both as part of a real-time event processing system, and as a configurable standalone associator that can be applied to a large variety of seismic problems. Here we describe the GLASS3 algorithm and demonstrate (including input data and configuration files) its use in associating phase-ambiguous picks on multiple scales.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

William L. Yeck, John Patton, Caryl E. Johnson, David Kragness, Harley M. Benz, Paul S. Earle, Michelle M. Guy, Nicholas Ambruz. 2019-05-14. GLASS3: A standalone multi-scale seismic detection associator. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120180308

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Continuity of the Reelfoot fault across the Cottonwood Grove and Ridgely faults of the New Madrid Seismic Zone

Previous investigators have argued that the northwest-striking Reelfoot fault of northwest Tennessee and southeastern Missouri is segmented. One segment boundary is at the intersection of the northeast-striking Cottonwood Grove and Ridgely strike-slip faults with the Reelfoot fault. We use seismic reflection and geologic mapping to locate and determine the history of the Reelfoot South fault across this boundary zone. One reflection profile revealed a southwest-dipping (81°) Reelfoot South reverse fault that displaces the top of the Paleozoic 65 m, Cretaceous 40 m, Paleocene 31 m, Eocene Wilcox Group 20 m, and Eocene Memphis Sand 16 m. A second reflection profile reveals a north-dipping (84°) reverse fault 4.3 km south of the Reelfoot South fault, which defines the southwest margin of the Tiptonville dome. A geologic profile of the base of the ∼3:1 Ma Upland complex (Mississippi River terrace alluvium) within theMississippi River bluffs reveals ∼6 m of displacement across the Reelfoot South fault. Similarly, Quaternary stream terrace distribution suggests ∼6 m of Reelfoot South hanging-wall (Tiptonville dome) uplift that is probably Holocene. Fault strike trends show the Reelfoot fault and its hanging-wall Tiptonville dome are not laterally offset across the Cottonwood Grove and Ridgely faults. The Reelfoot South fault northwest and southeast of the Cottonwood Grove and Ridgely faults has very similar vertical displacement on common stratigraphic marker horizons in the upper 900 m. These data indicate the Reelfoot fault/Tiptonville dome has acted as one continuous fault zone across the Cottonwood Grove and Ridgely faults since Late Cretaceous.

Missouri, Tennessee

Use of fragile geologic structures as indicators of unexceeded ground motions and direct constraints on probabilistic seismic hazard analysis

We present a quantitative procedure for constraining probabilistic seismic hazard analysis results at a given site, based on the existence of fragile geologic structures at that site. We illustrate this procedure by analyzing precarious rocks and undamaged lithophysae at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The key metric is the probability that the feature would have survived to the present day, assuming that the hazard results are correct. If the fragile geologic structure has an extremely low probability of having survived (which would be inconsistent with the observed survival of the structure), then the calculations illustrate how much the hazard would have to be reduced to result in a nonnegligible survival probability. The calculations are able to consider structures the predicted failure probabilities of which are a function of one or more ground‐motion parameters, as well as structures that either rapidly or slowly evolved to their current state over time. These calculations are the only way to validate seismic hazard curves over long periods of time.

BSSA

Stable stress‐drop measurements and their variability: Implications for ground‐motion prediction

We estimate the arms‐stress drop, Graphic, (Hanks, 1979) using acceleration time records of 59 earthquakes from two earthquake sequences in eastern Honshu, Japan. These acceleration‐based static stress drops compare well to stress drops calculated for the same events by Baltay et al. (2011) using an empirical Green’s function (eGf) approach. This agreement supports the assumption that earthquake acceleration time histories in the bandwidth between the corner frequency and a maximum observed frequency can be considered white, Gaussian, noise. Although the Graphic is computationally simpler than the eGf‐based Graphic‐stress drop, and is used as the “stress parameter” to describe the earthquake source in ground‐motion prediction equations, we find that it only compares well to the Graphic at source‐station distances of ∼20 km or less because there is no consideration of whole‐path anelastic attenuation or scattering. In these circumstances, the correlation between the Graphic and Graphic is strong. Events with high and low stress drops obtained through the eGf method have similarly high and low Graphic. We find that the inter‐event standard deviation of stress drop, for the population of earthquakes considered, is similar for both methods, 0.40 for the Graphic method and 0.42 for the Graphic, in log10 units, provided we apply the ∼20 km distance restriction to Graphic. This indicates that the observed variability is inherent to the source, rather than attributable to uncertainties in stress‐drop estimates

BSSA